P
Path_Finder
Guest
Brent Bozzel, Newsbusters wrote this article which is considered important saying Karl Rove is ruining the Republican Party. Bozzel, btw, is Catholic. Sharp guy.
- Status
C
CaptFun
Guest
Thanks Ishii! Yeah. I like Santorum. But having gone on and on about that in a previous thread, I will spare you my many reasons why (again).
Governor Scott Walker I like for similar reasons. Chief of these is the venom of his enemies. Sometimes when I see the wolfpack surround a person and I can’t figure out why … I think there’s a possibility of a Matthew 5:10 - 16 going on.
Walker was viciously attacked and even subjected to a recall election - for what appearred to me to be the “sin” of trying to balance Wisconsin’s budget (with possible cutbacks to entitlements, public employee pensions etc.). In fact some of the “union” campaigners
were strutting around with signs like the old Communist clenched fist in the shape of Wisconsin! When he survived the recall I was very happy. But I don’t really know Walker.
I like that he’s the Governor of a state (an executive job, versus Congresspeople and Senators who vote as part of a body). Wisconsin is not an unsubstatial state either. It has seaports on the St. Lawrence seaway, Milwaukee is a major city and manufacturing hub. As a farm state it trades in grains (corn, wheat) and dairy products especially. Though it doesn’t have an International border, there is substantial trade with Canada - and via the seaway, Europe. Since a governor of Wisconsin has one foot in the urban, one in the rural and has been an executive - being President is somewhat similar.
Walker and Santorum have actually “done stuff” and big stuff while in office. Some candidates are ALL image and little substance. Some get elected anyway
.The pragmatic side of me likes Bush for similar reasons as Walker. The Governorship similarity for one. Florida is a critcal swing state for the GOP. Bush twice was elected its Governor. Bush’s hispanic family some will find surprising. He met and married his wife in Mexico. Part of me doesn’t want “another Bush” - but if the hedge keeps getting better ( I like Jeb better than either his Dad or brother so far), and if he could best unite the party for a narrow win - I could go with Jeb certainly.
As you could support Santorum (but favor others) I might drag my feet with Christie and Paul a bit. But none of the current crop of Democratic hopefuls would cause me to cross the line and vote for them.
I’m only now becoming aware of Indiana Governor Mike Pence.
Rubio and Jindal seem like good candidates. If either started winning primaries and gained traction … or became higher profile in a positive way, I’d strongly consider voting for them.
Huckabee might hurt Santorum in Iowa and the early going. He won Iowa in 2008. And should he poll higher than Santorum in Iowa it could really hurt the latter’s momentum.
Santorum’s loss in 2006 concerns me less than his inability to wrap up CPAC in 2012 after he temporarily took the lead in the delegate counts in the primaries. Whether it was Romney’s money that swayed CPAC, or his more moderate stances - Santorum had a moment where he was poised to take the GOP reigns - and didn’t make it.
I like that Santorum is vetted and was still standing when last seen. He endured assaults for his stands on the sanctitiy of marriage, life, and I don’t think he’d be hit with anything new (I’m thinking scandal or seeming scandal here … not pragmatic deficiencies like his one poor performance in the 2006 midterms).
With our world coming apart at the seams in the Middle East, our economy, this punitive and collossal failure of a “health care program” that seems more intent upon attacking my Church than Ebola - I’m hoping for someone strongly committed to (Good Lord, I’m going to say it …“Change”). As in “back to sanity”. A “Results and Improvement” answer to the “Hope and Change” bowl of steam and promises we got back in 2008.
I will begrudge the Democrats that they outzeal the GOP. I disagree with almost all of the things they go pedal to the metal for - but dang - Obama will do things like release terrorists in a five to one trade without apology.
They go ahead and back the radical gay activists against the Catholic Church with the sort of commitment I wish we’d see GOP leaders fight bad guys with (and usually don’t until the bad guys are much badder).I’ll admit that some good people in politics aren’t politic enough to win. Alan Keyes comes to mind. He did learn to smile more as he went along and reveal some charm … but he came on too strong for his line of work.
One day the Obama - Keyes debates will be viewed on a substance basis. And Keyes will come off better. As it was though, voters looked past Obama’s abominable record of absenteeism and radicalism (denying newborn babies any medical care if they had been “born alive” but had been targeted for death in a scheduled abortion? Brrrrr.). What they remembered was Keyes coming down hard on the morals and Obama simply responding (paraphrase): " … I don’t need Mr. Keyes to lecture me on morality …" Result? Landslide for Obama. One that set him up to be President.
It’s two years before the election. I may have to vote for Democrat-lite again (if the GOP candidate is at least pro-life and the Democrat not). For now though I’m glad to boost candidates I think might be great. Pragmatically - I’d prefer a narrow win for an “acceptable candidate” than a near miss by a (for me) “much better candidate”. But I hate being co-opted into that position. It’d be nice on inauguration day to go “finally!” :extrahappy: - and hope like the Who song “We Don’t Get Fooled Again!”.
uch:Every once in awhile God will bless a national leader. He is always ready to. And if a leader has a place for God in his heart and sincerely wants to do his best for his nation - blessings upon that nation might be forthcoming. That’d be a change I’d ***hope ***for.
I
ishii
Guest
Brent Bozell is pretty sharp - and a nephew of WFB Jr. He’s great on issues such as media bias. But, his article on Rove seems to be long on hyperbole and short on substance. He says Karl Rove and his friends wanted Arlen Specter over Pat Toomey. But so did conservative hero Rick Santorum! Conservatives sometimes play politics. Karl Rove said Sarah Palin lacked gravitas. She did! Since when is telling the truth - sometimes the hard truth - ruining the GOP?
I get that Brent Bozell is bitter at the last two elections and the compromises conservatives have made by nominating moderates and opposing conservatives. On the other hand, some of the candidates have been too flaky. Being conservative is not enough. One has to be electable as well. Perhaps Rove is wary of the GOP nominating candidates who make wild statements on social issues that torpedo their candidacies against vulnerable Democrats (that happened in 2012). Perhaps Rove is wary of tea party candidates who admit that yes, they were at one time, a “witch.”
Perhaps Brent Bozell should take the advice of his late uncle Bill: “support the most conservative candidate with the best chance of winning.”
Perhaps we should be wary of Karl Rove. But he is free to start his groups and within his rights to say that we can do better than Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock. I will listen and consider what he has to say - and make up my own mind.
Ishii
R
RGCheek
Guest
And the GOP establishment said the same thing about Reagan in 1976. But it was FORD who couldn’t win, not Reagan.
And every moderate “winner” has been a loser ever since.
R
RGCheek
Guest
Who can say that it wouldn’t have been worse with Romney?Are you kidding us, RG? Obama loves the poor so much, he has made millions more of them.
I am not saying that Obama was good, I am saying Romney and other ‘Big Government Conservatives’, aka RINOs, are no better than Obama. They want the same things done only the RINOs are willing to take more time doing it.
Look at the Gay Marriage issue. Back in 2003 all these BGCs were arguing that no amendment was needed to protect traditional marriage, just pass a law and make it illegal in each state and have the feds refuse to recognize state same-sex marriages. All the real conservatives knew that that was a ploy to buy the SameSex Marriage people time to sell their ideas and the courts would strike down the laws because the SCOTUS said there was a right to be married.
And here we are seeing gay marriage forced on all of us through the courts and our current leaders have changed their tunes to ‘well we just caint do nothing about it now yahll’ in their best fake Southern drawl.
Huckabee knew this would happen and said so but no one listened to him. And no one is listening now while he tells the GOP that ‘Values Voters’ will leave the GOP, just like UKIP left the ‘Conservative Party’ in the UK or the Canadians that formed the Reform Party, knowing that they would have to wander in the Wilderness for a while till the country got idea that the Conservatives weren’t all that conservative and started voting for the new alternative parties instead.
THAT is what we need to do in the USA till these people leading the GOP into irrelevance wake up or get shoved aside for a new generation that ahs some faith in doing what is right, not what is considered ‘smart’.
R
RGCheek
Guest
Why would it be a likely loser? Because the GOPe wont support real conservatives any more?
R
RGCheek
Guest
Karl Rove is the latest permutation of RINO, old Rockefeller wing of the GOP that was progressive, but just couldn’t win without the yahoos and red necks voting for their candidates, so they pose and do their best southern accents and lead the GOP into one defeat after another. He got lucky with W Bush in 2000 because W knew how to act like a conservative better than Rove and was way ahead of Karl on that bit.
But W said that social issues were ‘just politics’ and never did a thing to move the social agenda when he had the opportunity in 2002-2004.
For me that was the watershed, and it woke me up.
The GOP is led by fakes, frauds and crooks, just like the Democrats because they are both just opposite sides to the same corporate owned coin.
We need a new alternative that can be Real opposition.
I am sick to death of GOP pretenders.
I
ishii
Guest
I like Walker too. Its funny - I could see him as a vice president too. Not sure whether it should be Walker/Jindal or Jindal/Walker. Part of me thinks we should have an all governor ticket and run against “broken Washington” (which it is). Or a combination of Walker and some other candidate. One thing I like about Walker: he has to know very well the tactics and goals of the left. My ideal candidate has to understand the nature of the left, not say things like, “my distinguished colleague and I agree on the basics, but disagree on how to get there” type of mush. I don’t think Obama is honorable. I don’t think he (or other liberal leftist candidate) has the best interests of our country in mind. I think Walker, given his struggles probably gets this more than anyone save for… Santorum. But Romney, Paul Ryan, even Rubio and Jindal probably don’t get it. I hope I’m wrong on that. You have to know your enemy.
The main problem I have with Bush is that he’s kind of squishy on border security/immigration- as if being married to a Hispanic requires that he go easy on the illegals, as opposed to be for securing the borders. But more importantly, I believe the country doesn’t want another Bush. And if its Bush vs Clinton, I fear the race could be reduced to the question: which do you prefer, the 90’s under Clinton (peace and prosperity) or the 2000’s under Bush (war and economic downturn).Walker and Santorum have actually “done stuff” and big stuff while in office. Some candidates are ALL image and little substance. Some get elected anyway
The pragmatic side of me likes Bush for similar reasons as Walker. The Governorship similarity for one. Florida is a critcal swing state for the GOP. Bush twice was elected its Governor. Bush’s hispanic family some will find surprising. He met and married his wife in Mexico. Part of me doesn’t want “another Bush” - but if the hedge keeps getting better ( I like Jeb better than either his Dad or brother so far), and if he could best unite the party for a narrow win - I could go with Jeb certainly.
I would hope not. I was livid at Christie for what I thought was his betrayal of the GOP days before the election by hugging Obama. But, I do think that Christie gets it - he understands the left. And he has shown he’s willing to take them on.
I think Rubio is a better communicator than Jindal . But Jindal is way smarter than any of them. Rubio/Jindal - not a bad ticket.
The battle of yesterday’s candidates. Because I believe both are the candidates of the past, not the future.
True. But I think my point still stands that he was able to stick out in a very weak field - essentially Gingrich and Romney (both very flawed) and a bunch of dwarves. Not so in 2016.
Exactly ! Results and improvement. And who better to deliver on results and improvement than a successful governor ticket.
Obama/Democrats have the media to prop them up.I will begrudge the Democrats that they outzeal the GOP. I disagree with almost all of the things they go pedal to the metal for - but dang - Obama will do things like release terrorists in a five to one trade without apology.
I think your comments make sense. I would prefer a more conservative candidate. But I think we do have those who are competitive - Rubio, Jindal, Walker. Christie is probably as conservative as he can be in a state like New Jersey. I don’t really give guys like Paul, Cruz or Ben Carson, et al much thought as I don’t really think they can win. Paul Ryan I think is too nice and earnest - I see no indication that he really gets the true nature of the left. Mind you - I’d vote for any of them if they got the nomination.
Ishii
I
ishii
Guest
Right. Good luck with Virgil Goode or whoever the 3rd party perfect candidate is in 2016 and getting more than .09% of the vote. Let me know how that works out for you.
Ishii
I
ishii
Guest
The GOP could support Santorum/Cruz ticket. But the GOP makes up less than 50% of the electorate so that is not enough. In order to win, the candidate has to get votes from independents, moderates and swing voters too. That is political reality. Reagan understood that. I don’t think you do.
Ishii
R
RGCheek
Guest
Let me repeat the data once again.
Electorate response to polling;
40-45% self identify as CONSERVATIVE.
30-35% self identify as moderate.
20% or so self identify as liberal.
Exit polls from those that actually voted since 2000:
30% conservative
50% moderate
20% liberal
The GOP is not losing because they cant appeal to the middle, they do that.
What the GOP is manifestly failing to do is get their own base to the polls to vote. The moderates are losing 3% of the conservative base for every 1% of the moderate vote that they win. In every election at least one third of moderates vote GOP since 1973 and the last realignment of our nations political system.
If the GOP energizes the base like Reagan actually did, the guy moderates like you swore couldn’t win, that he was a loser and no way would most Americans vote for him, that same Reagan won in TWO LANDSLIDES.
And I am not talking about winning the next election by voting for some third party fragment. I am talking about setting up an independent party that is actually conservative and that continues to push a real conservative agenda like the Reform Party did in Canada and then eventually returned to the Conservative Party and took it over. Like UKIP is now doing in the UK where they lead in every poll.
There is huge difference between waiting patiently while transforming the political landscape like the Reform party and UKIP have done or are doing vrs going off and voting for a bunch of fringe folks who are not actually planning on ever taking office.
P
Path_Finder
Guest
This is well said.
Also, the smaller parties, American Independence Party have been around since 1968; so to all of a sudden dub these small parties as where Conservatives go seemingly is myopic, ditto that the Libertarian Party before the last election was probably a much more Conservative cause than now what it has become.
S
saintjohnxxiii
Guest
Source for these numbers?
P
Path_Finder
Guest
Polls certainly have shown numbers such as said.
T
TMC
Guest
There is another problem that many on the hard right refuse to admit. The fact is that many of those that self-identify as conservative will never vote for an extreme right candidate like Cruz, and maybe even Santorum. Most of my life I referred to myself as conservative. The last ten years or so I have begun to call myself moderate, because I don’t want to be associated with reactionaries and extremists. My views have not changed–“conservatism” has become captive to a hard right minority. Most of my friends are still firmly in the conservative camp, but most do not want to elect someone like Cruz. Extreme GOP candidates result in them staying home, or even supporting a moderate Dem (where there is one running). So its not just capturing some of the moderates (like me), its also holding on to the mainstream conservatives.
I think that a hard right third party would be good for the country. Not because it would ever win a national election, but because it would draw the extremists out of the GOP so it can once again represent mainstream conservatives and moderates.
I
ishii
Guest
Ha. I have also read that many African-American blacks are “conservative.” If so, why don’t they vote GOP? Your stats above, (wherever they come from) are meaningless. Its not only about how people self identify. What would be interesting would be to ask those who self identify as conservative - to define what they mean by conservative.
Reagan won 30 & 34 years ago. The electorate is way different now - so many more people getting entitlements and voting for the party which promises to maintain the gravy train. The “Reagan Democrats” (blue collar social conservatives) are either dead or finally joined the GOP. You can’t take 1980 &1984 and apply that to now. We do need someone who can communicate well with the American people - like Reagan did. If you think Cruz or Santorum has demonstrated a similar ability - please explain. . And btw, I’m not a moderate - just a realist.
Just a heads up - Canada and UK have a parliamentary system - quite different from our two party system. What needs to be done is to influence the GOP so that it is conservative. The Tea Party has been doing a good job of that.
Overall, I think from your analysis above you don’t really understand politics very well, or political/electoral history. Furthermore, your analysis of Romney is wrong: he would have been a good president and would have governed way to the right of Obama. So maybe what needs to happen is not to create another fringe 3rd party - but for the true believers to wake up and realize that the candidate you agree with 70% of the time is your friend, not your enemy.
Ishii
I
ishii
Guest
Well, when people refer to guys like Cruz or Santorum as too “hard-right” I ask them to tell me on which issue do Cruz or Santorum disagree with Reagan? The only issue I can think of might be immigration - but that wasn’t the burning issue back in the 70’s and 80’s. So tell me - on which issues are those guys to the right of Reagan? I think the difference is that Reagan framed the issues not in an angry way like Cruz but in a positive, forward thinking way - “morning in America” etc. Also, I think the country is much less conservative than it was in the 80’s - this is primarily due to so many receiving entitlements from the govt.
Ishii
P
Path_Finder
Guest
cbn.com/cbnnews/politics/2014/October/Huckabee-Ill-Leave-GOP-Become-Independent/
Totally agree, what I wonder is if the Tyrannical Court of America forces homosexuality on the country in same-sex marriage if the GOP will continue to state their support for the morality of traditional marriage in their platform.
P
Path_Finder
Guest
I went through the process and voted for the winner, sometimes this has to be done.
But I agree, if in the end, we fail, best it to fail as supporting something that is moral, correct and that is right. Not because a half-way establishment-elite-picked candidate (who I still voted for) was nominated. Let the will of the public be done.
If the Hollywood-Elite-Immoral-Left-Radical-Religion-Sympathizing-DNC is to govern this country, it may be time to become more than one country.
G
gamewell45
Guest
I’d take a guess that the GOP platform hurts many African-Americans and by that I mean the proposed cuts in social programs, repeal of ACA, etc. Why would anyone support a candidate who, in their opinion, would make changes that might not represent their best interests? I know I wouldn’t.
- Status